I have marked the term paper out of 40. Marks in the range 20-25 were of C quality, which meant they did not clearly present issues. Marks in the range 25-30 were of B quality, which meant they had generally superficial reasoning. Marks above 30 were of A quality, which meant they presented issues and reasons; the reasoning ranged from very generic motherhood-and-applie-pie reasons about OO and layers at the bottom end, to a presentation of both sides of an argument (ie reasons for and against) in specific detail about classes/interfaces/etc.
I have revised the Assignment 2 marks.
Grading, as recommended by me to the Department, is for A's when the total mark is above 77, and B's when below that.
Office hours will be Thursday May 13, 2004 from 15:00-18:00 in ER-603-53. Send me an email if you plan to attend office hours. Also send me an email if my arithmetic is wrong, or I have made other mistakes with the marks.
Group A1 A2 A3 TP Total
5049571 3 19.3 15.0 17.0 26 77.3
5107695 7 17.4 10.0->16.0 15.0 38 86.4
5079403 1/1/8 13.8 5.0->10.0 15.0 26 64.8
4613430 10 18.5 17.5 17.0 25 78.0
4583353 10 18.5 17.5 17.0 34 87.0
4426770 3 19.3 15.0 17.0 28 79.3
5291089 4 18.4 15.0 15.0 34 82.4
4649389 6 18.4 12.0 17.0 26 73.4
4421515 11a 17.0 8.0->13.0 15.0 36 81.0
4585089 9/9/11a 10.0 12.5 15.0 30 67.5
5258413 6 18.4 12.0 17.0 36 83.4
5317134 2 15.8 5.0->10.0 14.0 33 72.8
4396979 11a 17.0 8.0->13.0 15.0 26 71.0
4984560 3 19.3 15.0 17.0 31 82.3
5295467 4 18.4 15.0 15.0 30 78.4
5922909 5 15.4 7.0->10.0 14.0 22 61.4
4534247 10 18.5 17.5 17.0 33 86.0
5258170 8 17.0 5.0->10.0 15.0 26 68.0
5254558 6 18.4 12.0 17.0 34 81.4
4808673 5 15.4 7.0->10.0 14.0 28 67.4
4859987 11b 17.0 9.5->12.0 15.0 33 77.0
5088941 4 18.4 15.0 15.0 32 80.4
5160650 7 17.4 10.0->16.0 15.0 38 86.4
4046161 5 15.4 7.0->10.0 14.0 27 66.4
4752643 2 15.8 5.0->10.0 14.0 33 72.8
5047714 8 17.0 5.0->10.0 15.0 22 64.0
5084830 8 17.0 5.0->10.0 15.0 31 73.0
3609146 11a 17.0 8.0->13.0 15.0 26 71.0
4760697 11b 17.0 9.5->12.0 15.0 36 80.0
5261074 8 17.0 5.0->10.0 15.0 28 70.0
4418905 3 19.3 15.0 17.0 25 76.3
4238699 7 17.4 10.0->16.0 15.0 24 72.4
4632141 5 15.4 7.0->10.0 14.0 22 61.4
5104467 2 15.8 5.0->10.0 14.0 34 73.8
4586360 10 18.5 17.5 17.0 25 78.0
4791088 10 18.5 17.5 17.0 23 76.0
4758307 3 19.3 15.0 17.0 32 83.3
Team 1: Bing Chen, Hai Hong Song, P. Leelahapant, Yang Gao
Team 2: Keywan Esfahani, F. Shadpey, Bahman Zamani
Team 3: Longchang Fu, Jingxue Zhou, Mouloud, Shengli Huang, Yujie Wang
Team 4: Nauman Khan, M. Halachev, N.N. Nguyen
Team 5: Jason Lee, A. Nemalhabib, J. Rodriguez, Yuan Yao
Team 6: Mubarak Mohammad, J. Hewitt, Lazhar Halleb
Team 7: Frederic Plouffe, K.H Pedersen, Ying Xing, A. Biswas
Team 8: Jiaoyue Wang, Yajie Su, Xiao Su, Xi Fu Liu
Team 9: Tao Yang, Hong Shao, Yu Han
Team 10: Yan Zhang, Ke Zhong, Wei Du, Yuchun Dai, Qun Li
Team 11: Liyaun Han, Anna Titkova, Changzheng Huang, Emil Vassev, Doan Nguyen
Team 11a: Liyaun Han, Anna Titkova, Changzheng Huang
Team 11b: Emil Vassev, Doan Nguyen
Teams 1 to 11: 13.8, 15.8, 19.3, 18.4, 15.4, 18.4, 17.4, 17.0, 10.0, 18.5, 17.0
Marking scheme (out of 20)
domain model for problem domain (10 marks): class diagram with named associations,
text description of concepts and relationships (clarity,completeness of coverage)
scope (2 marks): a main use case diagram, simple descriptions of each use case
(approx 3 use cases)
object models (5 marks): object models, object match concepts in class diagram,
links match relationships in class diagram, text explanation
glossary (3 marks): definition of concepts and relationships for problem domain
Teams 1 to 10, 11a, 11b: 5, 5, 15, 15, 7, 12, 10, 5, 12.5, 17.5, 8, 9.5
If you disagree with your mark, then send me email indicating what mark you think that you should get for each component (according to the marking scheme) and why.
Marking scheme (out of 20)
Clear description of representation of a query execution plan (5 marks)
Clear interface for query execution subsystem (3 marks)
Classes explaining Iterators and Collections (3 marks):
also, Index, Filter, Shared Objects
Clear explanation of how Iterators work (7 marks):
sequential iterator (1 mark); Index-using Iterator (2 marks);
Filter-using Iterator (2 marks); Merging Iterator (2 marks), eg
Cartesian, Union, ...
Effect of Set, List, Bag Collections (2 marks) should be explained
Team 1:
Team 2: Keywan Esfahani, F. Shadpey, Bahman Zamani
Team 3: Longchang Fu, Jingxue Zhou, Mouloud, Shengli Huang, Yujie Wang
Team 4: Nauman Khan, M. Halachev, N.N. Nguyen
Team 5: Jason Lee, A. Nemalhabib, J. Rodriguez, Yuan Yao
Team 6: Mubarak Mohammad, J. Hewitt, Lazhar Halleb
Team 7: K.H Pedersen, Ying Xing, A. Biswas
Team 8: Jiaoyue Wang, Yajie Su, Xiao Su, Xi Fu Liu, Bing Chen
Team 9:
Team 10: Yan Zhang, Ke Zhong, Wei Du, Yuchun Dai, Qun Li
Team 11:
Team 11a: Liyaun Han, Anna Titkova, Changzheng Huang, Yu Han
Team 11b: Emil Vassev, Doan Nguyen
Teams 2 to 8, 10, 11a, 11b: 14, 17, 15, 14, 17, 15, 15, 17, 15, 15
Assigment 3: Architectural Design of System
Use the 4+1 architectural approach with UML models
For each of 4+1 views that you think is useful, present
--- an overview model
--- one or more models with details, as required
[you must show major subsystems as packages, at the very minimum]
Present a Design Rationale for the architecture:
what were the key issues
what were their alternative solutions
which solution did you choose
Indicating your choice of architecture (style or pattern) and its
rationale
Show how the system (as a whole) works, make clear the responsibilities
and interfaces of each subsystem, and illustrate how the major scenarios
are executed
For important subsystems, discuss the design rationale in terms of design
patterns. Present at least an interface and the major classes in a class
diagram.
Marking scheme (out of 20)
Appropriate use of the 4+1 views (2 marks)
Clear overview of subsystems, their responsibilites, and interfaces (5 marks)
Design rationale for architecture (3 marks)
Clear description of how system works for major scenarios (5 marks)
Design rationale for subsystems ( 3 marks)
Clear description of major classes of each subsystem (2 marks)